[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 214 KB, 400x399, frodo.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5998393 No.5998393 [Reply] [Original]

When God told Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, how where they supposed that disobeying god was bad before they ate the fruit?

>> No.5998399

Because shut up goyim and feel guilty about existing

>> No.5998410

Because they were supposed to have faith in God's knowledge of good and evil.

>> No.5998413

>not realizing Eve knew exactly what she was doing
>not realizing they couldn't procreate and "go forth and multiply" without having partaken of the fruit
>not realizing it wasn't all part of God's plan

>> No.5998416

What were they supposed to do, eat the snake?

>> No.5998418

>>5998410
How did they know they were supposed to have faith? They had no concept of good and evil so they couldn't discern that having faith would be better than not having faith.

>> No.5998426

>>5998410

But they didn't know what that even was. It's like someone coming up to you and that, if you don't care about the flibbbedyflobbbedyfloop, he will torture you forever

>> No.5998436

Almost none of the stories in the Bible make sense.

How did Cain find a wife, for example?

>> No.5998444

the fruit taught them sin so they knew what bad is and how it's different from good

but they already had the conception of what's right and what's wrong (otherwise they simply couldn't function because it's the basis of any choice) and not to obey the god's order was wrong

>> No.5998452
File: 271 KB, 1000x855, gnosis.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5998452

The Judeo-Christian God is a tyrannical demiurge who wanted to keep humanity captive and ignorant, Satan is a Prometheus figure, stealing the light of knowledge and giving it to the humans so they can discover the ultimate truth that is divine knowledge so that they may escape from the grasp of the demiurge and set their souls free from the material plane and transcend towards pure light.

>> No.5998459

>>5998436
the bible doesn't say that cain and abel were the only children of adam and eva for their whole lives
cain later married his sister, or possibly a children of some other adam children i'm not sure

>> No.5998463

>>5998444
>they already had the conception of what's right and what's wrong (otherwise they simply couldn't function because it's the basis of any choice)
So do animals have the conception of what is right and wrong?

>> No.5998472

>>5998393
It was the advancement from obedience to authority to obedience to morality. But then the rest of the book goes back to relying on simple argument from authority so yeah.

>> No.5998477

>>5998463
in a sense
animals aren't sapient though so humans have it at a cardinally different level

>> No.5998487

>>5998477
That sapience might be exactly what we got from nibbling on the forbidden fruit though.

>> No.5998499

>>5998487
it directly contradicts genesis because adam could communicate with the god, name animals etc before eating the fruit

>> No.5998621 [SPOILER] 
File: 9 KB, 320x232, 1421262405278.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5998621

>>5998410
>believes that it knows gods faith
my precious

>> No.5998842

>>5998393
Because he was the smartest guy they knew who gave them lots of stuff for free. Should have just trusted him.

>> No.5998864

Adam and Eve did not commit a sin, they committed a TRANSGRESSION, which is not evil and they would not be held accountable for it. Like everyone is saying, they had no concept of good and evil so they couldn't have actually committed a sin. They do not have to repent of it.

In the same way a child can do something bad, but cannot be truly held accountable for what they did. A child commits transgressions, not sins.

The mainstream Christian interpretation of the Garden of Eden is pretty lame, which is what you're all basing this discussion on. Original sin has no logical to uphold it.

>> No.5998870

>>5998499
But he didn't have an idea of right and wrong because God forbade him from eating the upgrade.

>> No.5998872

>>5998842
damn, maybe i should have gone into that van

>> No.5998876

>>5998864
So they were banned from paradise and doomed along with all their offspring because of a transgression? That's like torturing a dog to death because it didn't wipe its feet before entering the house.

>> No.5998877

>>5998864
>trying to make Christianity make sense
not even once.

>> No.5998895

>>5998876
Well, they couldn't be in the Garden of Eden in a fallen state. They had to have the ability and the environment in which to choose right and wrong for themselves, now that they had the knowledge. If you have the knowledge of good and evil without the ability to choose between it, what's the point?

>> No.5998904

>>5998895
>Well, they couldn't be in the Garden of Eden in a fallen state.
Why not?

>> No.5998926

>>5998904
because it was a perfect place, and they were no longer perfect. If you were in the Garden of Eden, you'd be in the presence of God, and it'd be very very uncomfortable, almost unbearable, for someone to be in presence of God unless they are "transfigured" to be more like God.

>> No.5998950

>>5998393
> [...] good and evil, how where what why when who?

>> No.5998969

>>5998926
so, in order to be perfect, one must have no concept of perfect?

>> No.5998973

>>5998969
how, then, is god perfect if he knows what's perfect?

>> No.5998978

>>5998969
They weren't dumbasses, they had a concept of perfect and non-perfect. Which is why Eve knew she had to partake of the fruit if she wanted to grow and learn as a human being with a physical body.

>> No.5998990

>>5998978
if she knew what she needed to learn, why couldn't she just figure it out? it's not as if it's a difficult concept, and god has given them all the information they would need already:

do what i say and you'll be fine. don't do it and you'll die

what's so special about this magic fruit?

>> No.5999019

>>5998990
You know, I wish I knew.

I feel like God follows (or created, but still follows) the rules of this universe and that He doesn't just use ~~magic~~ to do the things He does. There is a rational and scientific explanation for everything He can accomplish.

For instance, Christ turning water into wine? Hell, I can do that today myself. It's called Kool-Aid. But dehydrated powders that flavor water hadn't been invented or conceptualized in His time, so the people around Him had no explanation for it.

I think it might be the same with the fruit of knowledge. Consumable information. I feel like you could make a sci-fi story out of that. "Eat this apple, and now you know the equivalent of having gone to med school." Who am I to say what is and isn't possible with all of what God must know, or what isn't possible for us as humans in the future.

So, to summarize, my theory is that the fruit of knowledge is some sort of fruit that was able to transmit information via consumption. But what the hell do I know?

>> No.5999034

>>5998452
oh

tell me more

>> No.5999054

>>5999034
look up luciferianism and gnosticism

>> No.5999073

>>5999019
there is still one thing that makes no sense at all here, though: why would god create something evil?

that which is like god is good. thus, if kept in a state of innocence, his humans are intentionally kept unlike him. he is therefore intentionally ordering them to be worse. however, if they reject his orders and try to better themselves, they separate themselves from him in another way. thus, there is no way for people to be good.

>> No.5999074

>>5999054
nah

>> No.5999075

Did you just figure that out? Religion doesn't make sense. Embrace deism if you really want there to be a God.

>> No.5999095

>>5998459
Nonsense on stilts.

>13 Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is more than I can bear. 14 Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.”

Who would find him?

>15 But the Lord said to him, “Not so[e]; anyone who kills Cain will suffer vengeance seven times over.” Then the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him. 16 So Cain went out from the Lord’s presence and lived in the land of Nod,[f] east of Eden.

He's banished to Nod.

>17 Cain made love to his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch. 18 To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methushael, and Methushael was the father of Lamech.

Suddenly, some chick is there. If this is a daughter of Adam and Eve, why is she not with them; has she been banished to Nod, too?

It doesn't make sense, and it's intellectually dishonest to say it does.

>> No.5999111

a better question to ask is:

Is God really omnipotent if he could not even foresee his own creations disobedience?

>> No.5999119

>>5999095
The Bible does not specifically say who Cain’s wife was. The only possible answer is that Cain's wife was his sister or niece or great-niece, etc. The Bible does not say how old Cain was when he killed Abel (Genesis 4:8). Since they were both farmers, they were likely both full-grown adults, possibly with families of their own. Adam and Eve surely had given birth to more children than just Cain and Abel at the time Abel was killed. They definitely had many more children later (Genesis 5:4). The fact that Cain was scared for his own life after he killed Abel (Genesis 4:14) indicates that there were likely many other children and perhaps even grandchildren of Adam and Eve already living at that time. Cain's wife (Genesis 4:17) was a daughter or granddaughter of Adam and Eve.

Since Adam and Eve were the first (and only) human beings, their children would have no other choice than to intermarry. God did not forbid inter-family marriage until much later when there were enough people to make intermarriage unnecessary (Leviticus 18:6-18). The reason that incest today often results in genetic abnormalities is that when two people of similar genetics (i.e., a brother and sister) have children together, there is a high risk of their recessive characteristics becoming dominant. When people from different families have children, it is highly unlikely that both parents will carry the same recessive traits. The human genetic code has become increasingly “polluted” over the centuries as genetic defects are multiplied, amplified, and passed down from generation to generation. Adam and Eve did not have any genetic defects, and that enabled them and the first few generations of their descendants to have a far greater quality of health than we do now. Adam and Eve’s children had few, if any, genetic defects. As a result, it was safe for them to intermarry.

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/Cains-wife.html#ixzz3OpXn1cwV

>> No.5999120

Why didn't the other animals eat from the tree?

>> No.5999125

>>5998413
He's a big guy.

>> No.5999133

>>5999111
The word you're looking for is omniscient, not omnipotent.

>> No.5999135

>>5999125
For u hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

>> No.5999139

>>5998842
Eric Orwell pls go

>> No.5999144

religion lmao

>> No.5999148

>>5999119
two people cannot spawn an entire species. the inbreeding would lead to extinction. "did not have genetic defects" is nonsense. the human genome is made up almost entirely of useless crap, and it does not change at a rate that would allow basically the entire thing being replaced like that. in fact, most of the stuff that actually has some function is still shared between humans and plants.

>> No.5999155

>>5999111
I think he did know. And he knew it was necessary.

>> No.5999171

>>5999111
>>5999155
You don't really need to see the future to know that they would either obey him for all eternity, or, at some point, disobey. And it's easy to see which is more likely.

>> No.5999184

>>5999139
kek.

>> No.5999194

>>5999148
speaking of which, why would a god who wants people to recognise him go to such lengths to make it look like we're here accidentally? genes are made up of a random jumble, very little of which actually does anything and some of which is actually directly harmful. it's also full of needless repetition. why would he go out of his way to make structures like this that look like they were just tossed together out of jumbled pieces in a hat and then provide a feasible explanation for their being that way (mutation and selection) that does not require his influence?

>> No.5999208

The question misunderstands what was actually imparted by the tree of knowledge. Its a bit of a misnomer because they had the knowledge of right and wrong(it's right to obey God, and wrong to disobey Him) but they didn't grasp their own situation(their nakedness) so what was imparted by the fruit wasn't knowledge, but guilt and shame.

>> No.5999220

You're missing point: the point of the adam and eve story is to show that women are partly demonic due to their closeness with the snake

>> No.5999228

>>5998990
One idea is that the knowledge taken from the tree of good and evil was experiential.

>> No.5999279

>>5998990
The fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and bad, imo, isn't so much information as it is a decision, and a way of life.

Like you alluded to, in those times (and even now), good and bad are, by definition, what God deems to be good or bad. By eating the fruit, Adam and Eve rejected this definition, and instead chose to live, as most of us do, defining good and bad by what we feel is good or bad.

In this way they became "like God", they accepted their own opinions as being the source of judging something as good or bad, rather then relying on God. Note that this is the same decision that Satan made when he rebelled against God.

Since humanity chose to try this new approach, God has allowed us (and Satan) to follow through on this "experiment", which has lasted the last 7 millennia or so: is it best to allow humanity to rule themselves and decide good and bad for themselves, or is it better for humanity to leave these things to God?

Of course, after 7 millennia and the current state of the world, the answer is obvious.

>> No.5999288

>>5998393
Because the eagles didn't give a shit

>> No.5999302

>>5999279
>Of course, after 7 millennia and the current state of the world, the answer is obvious.
no its not, i would eat from the tree of good and evil anyday of the week

a single spoonful of manna earned is greater than a bucket given

>> No.5999936

>>5998393
The Fall is an alegory for rival cults, it doesn't need to make perfect sense, I needs to make you think that johnny-foreigner over there with his priestesses and serpents and trees really need his head bashing in.

>> No.5999947

>>5998864
why does the Church refer to it as Original Sin if it isn't a sin?

>> No.5999988

Who gives a fuck, biology tells us the Adam and Eve is bull shit. So we have to treat The story as an allegory. Knowledge is evil because it destroys god

>> No.6000306

>>5999988
>Knowledge is evil because it destroys god
Which makes sense because the core of Christianity is the bible, some 2000 pages long covering history, philosophy, and prophecy for the entirety of human civilization

>> No.6000353

>>6000306
> covering false history, false philosophy, and false prophecy for the entirety of human civilization

ftfy

>> No.6000365

>>5998393
that wasn't the tree they really needed to keep away from. god just made a thing, left it lying around and realized it was a thing that set shit on fire and threw it out.

the tree of life was the gunpowder, the one with the knowledge was just some unimportant thing.

>> No.6001290

>>5998393
The Bible is filled with these inconsistencies, those who wrote it back then didn't expect us to actually think about it.

>> No.6001341

>>5999095
The Cain and Abel story existed in some other format before being synthesized with the preceding and following sections of Genesis. It's pretty clear that it was written originally about a setting in which many, many more people exist. For there to be some other land called Nod, and a wife for Cain to take there, there must be many more people than there could have been in the years following the creation of two progenitor humans. The ancient Hebrew stories are very much mixed with and derived from the stories of other ancient Near-Eastern peoples.

>> No.6001348

>>5999988
>destroys god
...what

>> No.6001357

>>5999988
*tips critical misinterpretation*

>> No.6001406

Destroys God: because the idea of a talking snake or a guy living in a whale is not disrobed with a little knowledge in science

>> No.6001533

Because with a little knowledge the idea of a talking snake and a guy living in a whale is fucking stupid

>> No.6001579

>>5999947
That's why I said mainstream interpretation. Original sin isn't actually a thing. They were wrong. (at least in my belief)

>> No.6001585

>>6001341
>implying its not the word of God

>> No.6001592

>>5998393

plot device.
also, tree location, plot device.

>> No.6001642

>>5999019
Or you could just not insert a redundant unobservable entity into your explanation of reality. If god's actions are entirely dictated by (because they do not violate) the physical laws of the universe, then he is indiscernible from them, and isn't needed at all to explain anything. So any postulating on the meaning of the stories of the bible or the intentions of this god is a total waste of time.

>> No.6001659

>>5998393
Now every human that will ever exist has their curse, Thanks Eve

>> No.6001663

Because God gave them a simple Cause and Effect. This is pre-morality. That's what is meant by knowledge of Good and Evil. God was expressing a rational ethics.

God said:

Cause-eating from tree of knowledge of good and evil
Effect-you will die

God didn't command anyone to do shit. He just said what would happen if you did.

>> No.6001673

>>5999194
To test us anon.

>> No.6001681

>>5998418
the point is our capacity to doubt is ultimately what separates us from god, and this capacity to doubt is aggravated, not resolved, by knowledge

>> No.6001682

>>5998463
Animals have a conception of egoist ethics. What is good is what is in their self-interest. What is bad is what is against their self-interest.

Man in considering himself operating under an order different from that of nature creates a system of morality and as such, a system of Good and Evil, Right and Wrong.

Also, fuck you mod for deleting my thread on a Deleuzian/Spinozist conception of animal ethics/morality as related to human morality/ethology.

>> No.6001688

>>6001682
Way to paint with a broad brush
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant_cognition#Elephant_altruism

>> No.6001691

>>5998876
Everything in paradise, in perfection acted according to its essence and did nothing that ran counter to that essence (it's power, capacity to act, striving to exist).

Adam and Eve acted counter to natural law and were driven by forces outside their inherent essence. As such, they were banished from the dominion of perfection, of nature.

>> No.6002077

>caring about Jew religion

Just follow Jesus

>> No.6002096

>>6001688

is there a word for when something seemingly benign hits you hard and you can't tell why? reading the part underneath about elephant death rituals kind of fucked me up for a second.

>> No.6002108

>>6002077

jesus was jewish you cretin

and how are we supposed to "follow jesus" when all we have to go on is his jew book, or are the passages in josephus and tacitus a sufficient summary?

>> No.6002140

>>5999279
where exactly are you getting your "satan origin story" story from anyway? what part of the bible talks about that?

>> No.6002168

>>6002140
also, if god had already carried out this dumb experiment with his angels, why would he do it again with humans?

>> No.6002502

>>5998393
Why didn't god just eat the snake?

>> No.6002525

>>5998418
faith and knowledge are distinct in eden I guess

>> No.6002608
File: 648 KB, 1280x800, Riley.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6002608

Why didn't God make humans perfect?

>> No.6002617

>>6002608
god is by nature perfect and anything that is not god is not perfect
if i have my theology right

>> No.6002622

>>6001642
Why would God not being needed to explain the physical world make His existence any less important? Belief in God improves the experience of life and the human experience. Not everything is about what you can describe or explain.

>> No.6002636

>>6002622

>Belief in God improves the experience of life and the human experience

So does heroin, if you ignore the kidney problems

>> No.6002641

>>6002636
And what is the drawback for belief in God?

>> No.6002644 [DELETED] 

>>5998413

>not realizing that god was actually satan, and lucifer was the one trying to make the best of man

>> No.6002647
File: 278 KB, 964x1210, Paradise_Lost_19.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6002647

>>5998413

>not realizing that god was actually satan, and lucifer was the one trying to make the best of man

>> No.6002651

>>6002617
Why can't everything be perfect?
By the way I'm asking this sincerely, I'm not trying to argue against God or Christianity or anything. I'm assuming there are theological answers for these questions

>> No.6002653

>>6002641

ignorance, delusion

>> No.6002654

>>6002641

At best it makes your reasoning faculties blunt. Religious people only seem really trained in coming up with new excuses of why they weren't wrong, when every single one of their talking points have been refuted.

At worst, it makes you shoot cartoonists and set up states in which forced amputations, decapitations and crucifixions occur on a daily basis

>> No.6002655

>>6002651
because god doesn't want it that way i don't know man

>> No.6002657
File: 409 KB, 518x567, Throw it in the trash.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6002657

>>6002647
>Vomiting Milton

Please take your 19th Century liberal interpretations elsewhere

>> No.6002666

>>6002622
How the hell does it improves the experience of life?

>> No.6002668

>>6002653
So you say. Though from where I'm sitting it seems that those who don't know God are operating on a willful ignorance.

>>6002654
Assuming that's true, what harm is there for someone who's reasoning is blunted? They live happy lives filled with hope for an after life and if they're wrong, they never find out. The latter part of your criticism is from religious extremism which I would agree is a bad thing.

>> No.6002671

>>6002668

> what harm is there for someone who's reasoning is blunted? They live happy lives

So do people with down's syndrome.

>> No.6002676

>>6002666
There's comfort in believing that there is a being who is in control of everything who cares about your pitiful life. Christianity in particular improves ones life because it contains a lot of practices and beliefs that improve cognitive functioning(see the research of Andrew Newberg), improve a sense of peacefulness, and steer people away from destructive behaviors.

>> No.6002698
File: 17 KB, 500x330, 1379396464286.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6002698

>>6002676

>citation needed

inb4 a rant about degeneracy courtesy of /pol/.com

>> No.6002702

>>6002671
And? If there is no God, then wouldn't the ideal life be one that is filled with happiness rather than one that is filled with proper reasoning but contains a lesser amount of happiness?

>> No.6002706

>>6002668
I won't give up on fucking random girls just to please The Greater Good, I won't live happy with myself..

>> No.6002708

>>6002698
Which claim do you need citations for?

>> No.6002710

>>6002702

Enjoy being a brain-dead derelict. It's not for me.

>> No.6002712

>>6002668

>They live happy lives filled with hope

It's false hope, the same type of hope by which people go bankrupt buying lottery tickets. The only difference is that winning the lottery has actually happened a few times, while the events that you describe have never demonstrably happened

>> No.6002718

>>6002706
So your reason for not believing in God is that it would require you to recognize that there is an objective morality and you couldn't revel in your pigsty? Christianity doesn't really require you give up the things you find pleasurable in this life immediately, but it promises a greater joy in living a Godly life than one with the cheap pleasures offered by sensual experiences.

>> No.6002720

>>6002708

all of them dumbass

>> No.6002724

>>6002712
It may be a false hope, but its a hope that if not realized won't be noticed. After all, if atheism is true then there is no consciousness after death. What do I care if my hope is misplaced if everyone ends up the same if it's false?

>> No.6002726

>>6002140
>>6002168
Good questions, I've honestly never been asked before.

As for Satan's origins, not a lot of "heavenly politics" are discussed, but there are some things we can infer. We know that it was God that created everything (Genesis). Further, we know that everything he created is good, because everything he does is good (Deut. 32:4, among others, I'm sure). From this, we infer that Satan was created by God. Further, the only spirit creatures described in the Bible are angels, and Satan is described as making himself into "an angel of light" (2 Cor. 11:14), so we can only assume that Satan was once an angel. Since angels are depicted in the Bible as sentient beings with free will, just like humans, we can say that Satan chose to not follow God, to oppose him. In fact, "the original Hebrew term satan is a noun from a verb meaning primarily 'to obstruct, oppose'" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan).).

I wish the Bible went into more specific detail on this stuff, but I'm really not finding much. For a 1500 page book, it really summarises a lot of stuff. Still, from the inclusions and omissions on Satan's background, this is the explanation that makes the most sense. If this isn't satisfying, I can try to find more stuff, but like I said, there's not much.

As for the second question, the "experiment" wasn't even done with angels first, that is, there's nothing that suggests that the angels had ever gone against God prior to Adam and Eve. Satan lying to Eve was the first recorded incident of an angel going against God. So, you could say the angels' experiment and humanity's is one and the same; just as we have the choice to follow God or choose our own path, the angels have the choice of following God, or leaving him and, as a dissenter, siding with Satan and becoming known as a demons (2 Peter 2:4, Jude 6, Matt. 12:22-27).

>> No.6002731

>>6002702
there isn't a reason. the problem is that, for those who end up not being able to believe any more, the believers can very easily become either torturers (intentional or unintentional) or a living testament to what the non-believer has lost and is jealous of.

>> No.6002732

>>5998864
>Original sin has no logical to uphold it.

your interpretation makes little sense
as they said you >>5998876
your answer >>5998895 isn't satisfying at all. since transgression, as described by you, isn't the fault of the person who transgressed, it's the fault of, guess whom? of the god. so it means the god planned it all from the very beginning. may be a stoic can accept such god but it's not the main christian conception (some protestants could accept it, i think, they are like that, have a huge hard on for predestination in any shape)

adam and eve didn't know sin because they never committed any, as soon as they committed the first, original one, they acquired the knowledge of sin. they weren't mindless before that and knew that to violate the prohibition of god was wrong.

>> No.6002735

>>6002718
My mother is catholic and I was raised as such. I have no faith, I never felt any "Love" for God, or any fervor whatsoever. I am not an atheist, I am agnostic at worst.

If God is truly real then I would hate its being for all the shit he has made humanity go through. I don't want a religion to tell me what to do, what to feel or what to think. I am a godless man, simple as that.

>> No.6002739

>>6002731
if there was some way to convince these believers to quit the preaching and attempts to revise national laws to suite their preferences, instead practising their beliefs away from other people, those problems would mostly disappear

>> No.6002740

Why didn't the Eagles fly Jesus to God?

>> No.6002742

>>6002651
God tried, but he also wanted to give people free will, and free will means the ability to choose to do wrong, to be imperfect. Since Adam chose to be imperfect, sin entered the world.

And that's what the whole Bible is about, really; how sin entered the world, and the steps being taken to return the world to perfection, all while not turning everyone into robots.

Captcha: helpE

>> No.6002744

>>6002724

Because I believe that you should leave the world in a better state than you found it in. Deluding yourself because it makes you feel good doesn't contribute to this

>> No.6002759

>>6002744
What metric is there for whether the world is in a better, neutral, or worse state than when you found it? I'd argue that an honest Christianity would improve the world if more people went with it due to the ethics put forth(not the deontology that people claim to be the law, but the idea that it is our duty to show love for each other and offer mercy and forgiveness before judgement) would improve the world more than soulless technological improvements tend to.

>> No.6002767

>>6002759
I live in a third world country, the majority of the population is in some sort of religion that teach "How good it os to follow God", The ones I know are among the most back stabber/hypocrite persons I know. Religious people are full of shit.

>> No.6002774

>>6002767
>>6002759
>(not the deontology that people claim to be the law, but the idea that it is our duty to show love for each other and offer mercy and forgiveness before judgement)

>> No.6002783
File: 1016 KB, 500x375, canti.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6002783

>>6002739
what actually ends up happening (in societies where both parties are somewhat free to interact but not to completely overpower the other) is this:

believer b is concerned for atheist a's soul (or wants to recruit him or whatever other reason). atheist a, just like everybody else, desperately wants to be saved, because the fear of a death with nothing coming after is awful. "i am euphoric" is as much directed at himself as at anybody else: an attempt to console himself now that he has lost the comfort of a purpose in life. atheist a gets upset about believer b's approaches, as b's acting condescending towards a when a knows b is unknowingly selling snake oil for a real problem they both have is very upsetting, and it gets moreso every time it occurs, which is very often. a then lashes out at b, often in a fit of emotion and with many insults. fighting escalates until we reach present-day america, where each side uses the other as a synonym for stupidity.

>> No.6002805

>>6002767
There are a lot of hypocrites, but that doesn't detract from the morality that underlies Christianity. It's easier to see amongst people you disagree with than those of like mind. A tree is known by its fruit, though.

>> No.6002817

>>6002774
The only thing that I've seen in religious people is Self-righteousness. They believe they have the moral high ground on everything, they don't offer forgiveness, they give out judgement, they label people and try to alienate them, that is what your modern christian do.

>> No.6002841

>>6002817
You haven't met a Christian, then.

There were people like this in Bible times as well. The Pharisees in Jesus' time were considered by society to be the most religious Jews around, but they really were just acting to get a good status in their communities, and not for God, which is why they were denounced by Jesus.

Being a Christian means loving your fellow man. Anyone who does not is not a Christian.

>> No.6002844

>>6002805
My lack of faith didn't let me be a christian. I won't convert to it and pretend that I am one when I don't feel it. There is also many things that I don't agree with. No amount of morality is going to change that.

>> No.6002867

>>6002841
I know the bible well, Anon. I know what a "Pharisees" is and how they act. Do you have a facebook account?, what is your opinion of those people that literally "Pray" on their facebook status?. That used to seriously piss me off.

It was things like, "Oh God, thanks for this day, for my health... yada yada yada". Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't you supposed to pray in solitude and in your own peace of mind?. I believe that is what drove me away initially. Religious people trying to draw attention.

>> No.6002868

>>6002844
I wouldn't ask you to, I was just pointing out that the implication of your post was "People who claim to be Christians(or of other faiths) are the most hypocritical, therefore Christianity(and other faiths) morality is bad." when in actuality most people who claim to be Christian aren't, and the Bible expounds in several places about false Christians(goats and sheep, path is narrow, not everyone who comes saying "Lord, Lord", even Satan masquerades as a servant of light). Many people get the wrong idea of Christian ethics being God saying not to do a bunch of things when they are in fact God saying to have good character above all else.

>> No.6002875

>>6002759

In that case, I'd recommend you to go to religious Africa first, non-religious Scandinavia second and then tell me where you'd rather live

>> No.6002879

>>6001681
same problem comes up though

>> No.6002886

>>6002867
That's right. Bragging about how "religious you are" is disgusting, and I try to stay away from those types. Now, I don't mind the occasional bible quote or reference or whatever, since it's also a Christian's job to be uplifting with other Christians, and spread the word to others, but there's a point where that accomplishes neither.

Christianity's problem isn't atheists or agnostics, it's fake Christians.

>> No.6002893

>>6002817
>The only thing that I've seen in religious people is Self-righteousness.
This is probably the only kind of righteousness you can conceive of, and genuine righteousness probably appears to you as empty posturing. How do you know they don't mean it?
>They believe they have the moral high ground on everything,
They arguably do. I have yet to see a convincing atheistic argument for a consistent moral code that is better than that offered by Christianity.
>they don't offer forgiveness,
No Christian you know has ever forgiven you for anything? This seems like far too broad a criticism.
>hey give out judgement, they label people and try to alienate them, that is what your modern christian do.
People who aren't Christian are more alienated than Christians can make them. But this is the point of Christianity: God has revealed Himself to us and it is our duty to walk in His footsteps and live the life He wants us to live.

>> No.6002898

>>6002868
I didn't mean that religious people are the most hypocritical, I know that people in general are like that, with or without religion. It is just that religious people are supposed to strive to be someone better. I agree with christian morality to some extent, I just don't follow its rules at all.

>> No.6002899

If it was only Adam and Eve in the beginning, then why weren't their grandchildren and great-grandchildren, the obvious products of incest, too mentally and physically deficient to keep living and procreating?

>> No.6002903

In Paradise Lost it's because they are literally repulsed by it.

>> No.6002912
File: 27 KB, 430x285, question everything.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6002912

Why was there a snake in the Garden of Eden to begin with?

>> No.6002916

>>6002899
Why did they live ridiculously long lives? How did women give birth to bucketloads of babies?

There's no obvious scientific explanation, except that maybe the genes of Adam and Eve were hella uber, and they got watered down over a few generations.

>> No.6002919

>>6002893
>genuine righteousness
That is the problem. It is not genuine, I know these people, I know how vile they truly are, and how good they try to look.

>They arguably do.
What is the use of a christian moral code when you just pretend to follow it?.

Tell me, with your own words, why having sex out of marriage a bad thing. I have yet to meet a single christian with a convincing argument, come on now, use your moral high ground if you really need it.

>No Christian you know has ever forgiven you for anything?

That is not what I said.

>> No.6002920

>>6002912
To keep the rat population down, I guess

>> No.6002930

>>6002898
The "rules" of Christianity are a veneer. The ethics of the Bible are entirely virtue ethics, but many people miss this because they don't take it as a whole and instead try to live by the law. The entire point of the law is that we can't keep it and in that inability we find a need for a savior. Then it becomes about edifying and becoming a person who values good for good and takes other people as ends in themselves. I don't keep many of the rules myself, and neither did most of the heroes of the Bible. David had a homosexual relationship, was a murderer, was an adulterer, and many other violations of the law but was a "man after God's heart."

>> No.6002938

>>6002930
Did David go to Heaven or Hell?

>> No.6002951

>>6002919
Not him, but the whole thing about Christianity is that we believe that whether something is good or bad stems from God, so literally every law is such because "God said so". Still, God acts in humanity's interest (lucky us!), so we don't have sex out of marriage because it ultimately helps us live happier lives.

Watching all my cousins having babies with losers or married people make me happy that I'm not out having sex.

>> No.6002968

>>6002938
Neither. "The living are conscious that they will die, but as for the dead, they are conscious of nothing at all" (Ecc. 9:5)

But the fact that he was allowed to serve as King until his death and become an ancestor to Jesus shows that he and God were on good terms in the end.

>> No.6002973

>>6002951
"God said so", you see, that is the very same argument every time. Birth control and condoms are a thing you know. But who am I kidding, sex is inherently bad just because I guess.

>> No.6002975

>>6002938
I don't really know. It depends on whether his vile actions were genuinely from the heart, or if he was simply corrupted by the world around him but truly had a virtuous heart. Of all the Biblical figures I'm most torn on whether he and Paul went to heaven or God just used these ambitious people to protect the people who were truly Godly individuals.

>> No.6002983

How many here actually believe Adam and Eve actually occurred?

>> No.6003001

>>6002973
Basically. The Bible doesn't really go out of its way to explain rationally why certain rules exist, but rather have us follow them because we're supposed to have faith in God.

I'm sure that the ancient Israelites wondered why they had to bury their poop and wash their hands by law, but it was probably for the best.

My guess would be that God intended for man to be in monogamous relationships, and so sex is something special to strengthen that relationship. Doing it with anyone and everyone kinda takes that away.

>>6002983
Yo

>> No.6003004

>>6003001
>Yo
Any other reason besides faith?

>> No.6003006

>>6003001
All right anon, thanks for your answer, godspeed.

>> No.6003020

>>6002919
>Tell me, with your own words, why having sex out of marriage a bad thing. I have yet to meet a single christian with a convincing argument, come on now, use your moral high ground if you really need it.

Studies have shown that multiple sex partners increases the chances of anxiety, depression, substance abuse, and a myriad of other psychological issues. As well as a correlation between high sex partners and cervical cancer. That's not to mention the destructive aspects it can have on relationships themselves. Sin is destructive, even if the acts seem harmless.

>> No.6003025

>>6003004
Not really. Of course there are all sorts of scientific explanations against it, but the thing is, scientific truth changes constantly whereas the Bible doesn't (inb4 muh translational errors: I kinda assume that if God went through the trouble of inspiring dozens of people to right the Bible over millennia, he would also make sure that the general gist is kept intact). A popular example is how archaeologists thought there really was no Balthazar, until a discovery was made, and of course he was specifically mentioned in the Bible all along.

As a Christian, taking the Bible as it presents itself to be true is a basic necessity, and I can't just exclude Adam and Eve just because it doesn't make a lot of sense to little old me.

Maybe someday God will reveal that it really was an allegory, and he'll explain why he put in this story, but until then, I'll take it as true.

>> No.6003033

>>6002735
and yet you somehow ended up even edgier than the atheists

>> No.6003036

>>6003006
Yep, it's been fun. See ya around.

>>6003020
Thanks for the heads up! Found a reference, if you ever need it: Ramrakha, S., et. al. (2013). The relationship between multiple sex partners and anxiety, depression, and substance dependence disorders: A cohort study.

Archives Of Sexual Behavior, doi:10. 1007 /s10508 -012- 0053-1

>> No.6003044

IF the judeo christian god is real why did he reveal himself to desert goatfuckers instead of the chinese or another advanced civilization of the time?

checkmate christians

>> No.6003061

>>6003025

>the thing is, scientific truth changes constantly whereas the Bible doesn't

Yes, it changes for the better

>> No.6003064

>>6003044
Troll or not, that's not a bad question. Why did God choose Abram? Out of everyone, God was just like, "Yeah, this Abram guy seems alright. I think I'll base my entire nation of Jews from this guy". Srsly

>> No.6003072

>>6003061
Indeed it does, usually. But "better" doesn't necessarily mean farther from the Bible

>> No.6003089

>>6003072

On explaining the workings of reality, it invariably moves away from the Bible.

Unless you can quote the verse where it explains gene theory

>> No.6003097

>>6003064
Well, they are the only still-powerful surviving culture from that time period.

>> No.6003115

>>6003097

Yes, because Hinduism has totally died out

>> No.6003125

>>6003089
I can't find a verse on gene theory (though it would be absolutely kickass if I did), but why would I? The bible is long enough as it is, the last thing it needs is extra stuff that would be boring at best, or would seriously alter the scientific growth of humanity at worst.

But science and the bible have often converged. For example, it was once believed that the universe had always been pretty much like it is now, but once background radiation was observed, the big bang theory was developed, which points to a starting point in the universe, matching Genesis 1:1. There are also other such things: Psalm 104:6, 8; Lev. 11:28; Lev 13:1-5; Deut. 23:13

>>6003097
>>6003115
Man, I should really read up on my ancient history. Not my strong point. Anyhow, God seems to like to start at one place and spread from there: Humanity came from Adam and Eve, the Israelites came from Abram/Abraham, and Jesus was the beginning of Christianity.

>> No.6003139

>>6003097
Their culture has shifted a lot tho.

>> No.6003183

>>5998393
>When God told Adam and Eve not to
That's all that matters.

>> No.6003461

>>6003183
Not if they hadn't learned yet that disobeying him was wrong.

>> No.6003506

>>6003461
Because it cost them immortality you fucking pleb, and yes God does explicitly say this.

>> No.6003516

>>6003506
How would they know losing immortality would be bad?

>> No.6003661
File: 34 KB, 1112x665, lechart.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6003661

>>6003025

Sure, sure.

>> No.6003691
File: 12 KB, 171x208, huutonaurua[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6003691

>>6003025
> the thing is, scientific truth changes constantly whereas the Bible doesn't

>> No.6003700

>>5998452
Lucifer hated the humans, he showed them the light to show them god's wrath

>> No.6003712

>>6003125
>For example, it was once believed that the universe had always been pretty much like it is now

And this was because people believed the bible. They believed God created the world as they saw it around them. Science has shown that the universe is constantly expanding and changing.

>> No.6003719
File: 36 KB, 221x246, 1409444324662.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6003719

>>6003700

>> No.6003747

>>6003700
All I know is, Lucifer hasn't written a book about how he wants people to behave.

>> No.6003751

>>6003747

Maybe because he's not god but just one oh his creatures you dumbidoo

>> No.6003755

>>6003751
That doesn't stop humans from writing books.

>> No.6003762

>>6003755

Yeah but they'll never have the legitimacy of god because they're not god uno

>> No.6003765

>>6003762
Did god write the Bible?

>> No.6003767

>>6003765

Not literally.

>> No.6003788

>>6003767
Then Bible has no legitimacy.

>> No.6003857

>>6003788

Ok then god didn't write any book so >>6003747
can go fuck himself right ?

right ?

>> No.6003897

>>5999119
The more you say the more I believe in ancient aliens.

>> No.6003904

>>6003747
Neither has God.

>> No.6003967

>>6001663
>And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
>But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

>> No.6003983

>>5998904
I heard someone discuss that it was because the tree of life is in the garden of Eden. The tree of life is mentioned in Revelation at the end of the story

>> No.6004024

>>6002920
Snakes are shit at pest control, they swallow a mouse and then spend days digesting it while doing nothing else. Why not the cat of Eden? Cats are primed for genocide.

>> No.6004026

>>6003967
>tree of knowledge of good and evil
>eat the fruit and you die
>god logic

And they didn't even die the day they atest thereof. God is a liar.

>> No.6004032

>>6002983
Well, at the very least we all date back to a single woman.

>> No.6004045
File: 95 KB, 334x250, charlemagne-hero-AB[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6004045

>>6004032
It is pretty straightforward mathematics that we must all be related. If everyone has a mother and a father, and they have mothers and fathers, and they have mothers and fathers, then pretty soon we will have more ancestors than there have ever been humans.

Let Stephen fry explain this to you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbpoopAHlR8

>> No.6004332

>>6004026
God never said that they would die that day... the seventh day.

>>6004024
Probably had cats, too. Can you call it a paradise without a cute lil' feline?

>>6003661
Yeah, it's kind of a leap of faith, I know

>>6003691
Not wrong, but feel free to have a giggle, m8

>>6003712
[citation needed]
Sir James Jeans, in the 1920s, was the first to conjecture a steady state cosmology based on a hypothesized continuous creation of matter in the universe.[3][4] The idea was then revised in 1948 by Fred Hoyle, Thomas Gold, Hermann Bondi and others. The steady state theory of Bondi and Gold was inspired by the circular plot of the film Dead of Night,[5] which they had watched together.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steady_State_theory

>> No.6005162

>>6002726
why are you conflating the serpent and satan?

>> No.6005272

>>5998436
Most interpretations state that Adam and Eve were the first Israelites. There were other humans but Adam and Eve were basically Human 2.0 the perfect humans who were to commit no sin. At least thats how everyinterpretation I've read put it.

>> No.6005471

>>6003025
What do you think the chances are that we find out DNA not to be the building blocks of our genetics? What do you think the chances are that we find that the sun really does revolve around the earth? You're a retard if you think these things will change constantly and you're a retard if you believe that adam and eve were literally real people.

>> No.6005492

>>5999148
>the inbreeding would lead to extinction
it depends on their set of genes... two modern humans cannot, sure, but not two perfect humans with little to no bad recessive genes, they could

>> No.6005499

>>5999148
>"did not have genetic defects" is nonsense. the human genome is made up almost entirely of useless crap, and it does not change at a rate that would allow basically the entire thing being replaced like that. in fact, most of the stuff that actually has some function is still shared between humans and plants.

i'm afraid you don't understand why interbreeding is bad

>> No.6006199

>>5999148
this, You only have to look at england to see the effects.

>> No.6006637

>>5998452
Fucking this. The entire Old Testimant is God being a huge dick.